Accurately logging boiled foods?

srecupid

I'm making corned beef for dinner. I'm putting it in a big pot and letting it boil all day. How do I go about accounting for any water that may get sucked up into it?

Need2Exerc1se

Weigh it raw and don't worry about the water since water has no calories.

Francl27

I just used a usda entry when I made some last time for cooked corned beef. It probably overestimated too...

Or you could weigh it raw then cooked and do the math.

Vicxie86

It is always best to weigh everything raw. If it's a big portion, i create a new recipe, log each ingredient and if i've cooked enough to last me 4days, i'll just log it as 0.25 portions.

srecupid

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

Weigh it raw and don't worry about the water since water has no calories.

Sharing. Plus i already know how much entire thing weighs because it's on the package

Francl27

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

Weigh it raw and don't worry about the water since water has no calories.

Yeah but unless he eats the whole thing.. the fact that it's cooked and absorbed water will change the nutrition value for the same weight.

Vicxie86

E.g. A piece of chicken breast @80kcals will not suddenly go up/down in kcals just because it got puffy with some water. If i eat half of that, that is still 40kcals. If he weighs it raw and eats 1/3 cooked, this will still amount to 1/3 of the raw kcals.

SezxyStef

I personally would just use the raw weight

or

Weigh it when it's done and use the same calories as raw to get a more accurate account for portion size.

lynn_glenmont

weigh raw. cook. drain as you would before eating. weigh entire roast again. use algebra to determine original raw weight of your portion.

example
original raw weight of entire piece of meat: 850 g
cooked weight of entire piece of meat: 1200 g
weight of cooked portion that you eat: 150 g

150/1200 = x/850
127,500/1200 = x
106.25 = x

Log as 106 g of raw corned beef (taking care to verify the database entry you use.

Francl27

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

weigh raw. cook. drain as you would before eating. weigh entire roast again. use algebra to determine original raw weight of your portion.

example
original raw weight of entire piece of meat: 850 g
cooked weight of entire piece of meat: 1200 g
weight of cooked portion that you eat: 150 g

150/1200 = x/850
127,500/1200 = x
106.25 = x

Log as 106 g of raw corned beef (taking care to verify the database entry you use.

I just count the number of servings in the raw meat (so 8.5 servings of 100g), then divide the cooked weight by the number of servings (1200/8.5) - so a serving is now 141g cooked. Then divide your serving by the serving size (150/141), and enter 1.065 as the number of servings with the raw entry. Same result but easier to track... for math failures like me.

Pretty much the most accurate way, yeah... assuming of course that you know the exact calories of your piece of corned beef. Considering that calories vary wildly depending on the amount of fat on a specific piece, it won't be accurate anyway, that's why I never bother and just use a USDA entry for cooked corned beef.

But it's what I do for pasta, rice, etc.

CattOfTheGarage

Boiled meat does not gain water as it cooks - I'm afraid it loses it.

Cooking meat by almost any method causes juices to be squeezed out. The fact it's submerged in water doesn't stop this, it's to do with the way the proteins contract as it is heated - raw meat is a bit like a relaxed sponge, cooked meat like a more or less squeezed one, and you can't force the fluid back in by soaking it. This is why meat shrinks as it cooks, and why even stewed or boiled meat can feel dry in the mouth if it's overcooked.

You can minimise fluid loss by cooking gently at a lower temperature, but you can never completely stop this fluid loss and shrinkage. Sous vide is the method that comes closest to no fluid loss, but some will still come out.

Sorry! I would personally use nutrient info for cooked meat, if available, not raw.

Heartisalonelyhunter

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

weigh raw. cook. drain as you would before eating. weigh entire roast again. use algebra to determine original raw weight of your portion.

example
original raw weight of entire piece of meat: 850 g
cooked weight of entire piece of meat: 1200 g
weight of cooked portion that you eat: 150 g

150/1200 = x/850
127,500/1200 = x
106.25 = x

Log as 106 g of raw corned beef (taking care to verify the database entry you use.

Do you honestly think that's a normal healthy approach to eating some food?

Wynterbourne

Heartisalonelyhunter wrote: »

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

weigh raw. cook. drain as you would before eating. weigh entire roast again. use algebra to determine original raw weight of your portion.

example
original raw weight of entire piece of meat: 850 g
cooked weight of entire piece of meat: 1200 g
weight of cooked portion that you eat: 150 g

150/1200 = x/850
127,500/1200 = x
106.25 = x

Log as 106 g of raw corned beef (taking care to verify the database entry you use.

Do you honestly think that's a normal healthy approach to eating some food?

You think there is a problem with accurately tracking what we consume? Guessing may lead to over eating or under eating. Why do either if we have the means to a fairly accurate calorie count? It's not like they are going into a restaurant kitchen with a scale and demanding to weigh their food before the chef cooks it.

lynn_glenmont

Francl27 wrote: »

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

weigh raw. cook. drain as you would before eating. weigh entire roast again. use algebra to determine original raw weight of your portion.

example
original raw weight of entire piece of meat: 850 g
cooked weight of entire piece of meat: 1200 g
weight of cooked portion that you eat: 150 g

150/1200 = x/850
127,500/1200 = x
106.25 = x

Log as 106 g of raw corned beef (taking care to verify the database entry you use.

I just count the number of servings in the raw meat (so 8.5 servings of 100g), then divide the cooked weight by the number of servings (1200/8.5) - so a serving is now 141g cooked. Then divide your serving by the serving size (150/141), and enter 1.065 as the number of servings with the raw entry. Same result but easier to track... for math failures like me.

Pretty much the most accurate way, yeah... assuming of course that you know the exact calories of your piece of corned beef. Considering that calories vary wildly depending on the amount of fat on a specific piece, it won't be accurate anyway, that's why I never bother and just use a USDA entry for cooked corned beef.

But it's what I do for pasta, rice, etc.

Just in case you're not joking: You're not a math failure. You have a method you understand that is a perfectly correct method for arriving at the correct answer, which demonstrates a strong intuitive understanding of the math. (And it's really the exact same thing I did, but without articulating the "x" that maybe reminds you of classes you didn't like?) In actual practice, I'm just as likely to do it "your way" as "my way" -- I just thought showing it as a "solve for x" problem would be easier to follow for people who don't have an intuitive understanding of the relationships between all those numbers.

lynn_glenmont

Heartisalonelyhunter wrote: »

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

weigh raw. cook. drain as you would before eating. weigh entire roast again. use algebra to determine original raw weight of your portion.

example
original raw weight of entire piece of meat: 850 g
cooked weight of entire piece of meat: 1200 g
weight of cooked portion that you eat: 150 g

150/1200 = x/850
127,500/1200 = x
106.25 = x

Log as 106 g of raw corned beef (taking care to verify the database entry you use.

Do you honestly think that's a normal healthy approach to eating some food?

??
Assuming that weighing and logging one's food is "a normal healthy approach to eating some food," which I believe it is, I don't see what's unhealthy about doing basic arithmetic that might take all of 15 seconds so that you can arrive at an accurate number to put in the log. Do you think using the recipe builder and weighing the finished result so that you can accurately determine what portion of all the calories in the total recipe you're eating is not "a normal healthy approach to eating some food"?

I use math all the time. I've used it to figure out my actual TDEE, as opposed to a prediction from an online calculator? Does that make my approach to weight loss and maintenance abnormal and unhealthy? I use math to check my car's gas mileage, because unexplained suddenly poorer mileage could indicate something wrong with car. Does that mean I have an abnormal, unhealthy approach to maintaining my vehicles? I use math to compare prices of different sizes and brands in the grocery. I suppose I must have an abnormal, unhealthy approach to making good purchasing decisions.

amy_kee

@lynn_glenmount Thanks so much for posting the math on how to figure this out. Your way totally makes sense to me and it's mathematically correct. I appreciate this.

PAV8888

I track my food intake using a tool called MFP... If you find this tool unhealthy for you... by all means don't use it!

For the rest of us:

* Weigh your ingredients before cooking and enter them in the recipe builder, or in an empty meal slot.
* Weigh the net total of final product you have created after it has been placed in a serving plate or storage container.
* Weigh what you eat when you eat it and assign calories based on the proportion of the total you've eaten.

EXAMPLE of cooking and logging a large omelette:

Either use the recipe builder or log in an empty slot:
200g Sweet Bell Peppers
200g Onions Raw
100g Eggs USDA
200g egg white pasteurized USDA
2g baking powder
2g chilli peppers dry
6g fresh dill

Once the whole meal is cooked, I weigh it. It weights 552g.

I change my servings in the recipe builder where I've initially logged the food as 2 portions, to 55 portions. I will be using 10g servings for this food. If it was 501g in total I might have used 5 portions instead.
OR
I save the meal as 2016, June 10, 552g Omelette and, after confirming it saved, I delete the entries I used.

Later in the day I eat half of this. I either log 27.5 portions or 0.5 meal

upoffthemat

srecupid wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

Weigh it raw and don't worry about the water since water has no calories.

Sharing. Plus i already know how much entire thing weighs because it's on the package

Don't trust the weight on the package. They can be 20% off legally and people have posted here a bunch of times showing how far off listed package weight can be from actual weight. And with Boiled Dinner there are enough parts of it that it can be hard to estimate. If you get more cabbage than potatoes and meat it is a lot less calories than otherwise. Weigh the components on your plate.

shadowfax_c11

I look for a USDA cooked entry for the food...

Nutrition Facts
Edit
Usda Nutrient Database - Beef, Cured, Corned Beef, Brisket, Cooked
Servings:
1.0

Calories 71 Sodium 321 mg
Total Fat 5 g Potassium 41 mg
Saturated 2 g Total Carbs 0 g
Polyunsaturated 0 g Dietary Fiber 0 g
Monounsaturated 3 g Sugars 0 g
Trans 0 g Protein 5 g
Cholesterol 28 mg
Vitamin A 0% Calcium 0%
Vitamin C 0% Iron 3%
*Percent Daily Values are based on a 2000 calorie diet. Your daily values may be higher or lower depending on your calorie needs.

Francl27

makingmark wrote: »

srecupid wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

Weigh it raw and don't worry about the water since water has no calories.

Sharing. Plus i already know how much entire thing weighs because it's on the package

Don't trust the weight on the package. They can be 20% off legally and people have posted here a bunch of times showing how far off listed package weight can be from actual weight. And with Boiled Dinner there are enough parts of it that it can be hard to estimate. If you get more cabbage than potatoes and meat it is a lot less calories than otherwise. Weigh the components on your plate.

This, but if it was weighed by the store, and not pre-packaged, it's probably more accurate.

But yes, usually cooked meat weighs less than raw, boiled or not.